Slashdot Mirror

Hell NO, we don't need those two making babies!

I should say not

it's that Crazy Frog ringtone

It's Axel F, goddammit. Axel F, written by Harold Faltermeyer in 1984 for the movie Beverly Hills Cop , the protagonist of which, played by Eddie Murphy, was named Axel Foley.

NOT "the Crazy Frog" song.

Oh, and for the record, that Puff Daddy song, I'll Be Missing You? That was written by this dude called Sting, in a song called Every Breath You Take in 1983.

Goddamned kids these days. They're all "But I hate the 80s!" yet conveniently ignore the fact that three-quarters of their "culture" is ripped off from the 70s and 80s. /rant

Is anyone else concerned that there will be a "Doc Ock" working with a high energy device?

Of course, the anchor tether will have to be stronger than spider's silk, so there should be someone on hand to keep Doc Ock in check!

A good start would be to pick those movies the Studios don't over-promote, such as ones from the 50s and 40s, and therefore wouldn't care much about being stolen. Shown them that people will buy "Charlie Varrick" or Jimmy Stewart flicks unprotected for a few bucks, and gradually they'll start loosening up their back catalogue of more contemporary films. At some point, on many of those movies they'll be paying more in fees to the copy-protection companies than they'd lose in theft. They'll further save the cost of packaging, as they'll only be available via iTunes and similar services. They hold the IP, someone else distributes and markets, money flows in on long-since amortized assets, and everyone is reasonably content.

One could argue they should give up on copy protection for anything more than a month or so old, as everyone who wants a copy has already bought/stolen it, but incremental advances will have to do at the moment.

A good start would be to pick those movies the Studios don't over-promote, such as ones from the 50s and 40s, and therefore wouldn't care much about being stolen. Shown them that people will buy "Charlie Varrick" or Jimmy Stewart flicks unprotected for a few bucks, and gradually they'll start loosening up their back catalogue of more contemporary films. At some point, on many of those movies they'll be paying more in fees to the copy-protection companies than they'd lose in theft. They'll further save the cost of packaging, as they'll only be available via iTunes and similar services. They hold the IP, someone else distributes and markets, money flows in on long-since amortized assets, and everyone is reasonably content.

One could argue they should give up on copy protection for anything more than a month or so old, as everyone who wants a copy has already bought/stolen it, but incremental advances will have to do at the moment.

I wonder if ferns ever look at us and laugh saying that non-quantum-sourced energy is so 3 billion years ago.

Maybe so, but then some herbivore eat a thousand of them, we eat a hundred herbivores, and we're the benefactor of all their magic!

If humans were photoheterotrophic or photoautotrophic, we wouldn't have enough energy to do much more than sit there sulking like a stupid fern. One of the sad realities of a creature like Swamp Thing (an apparent photoautotroph) is that he wouldn't really be able to move quickly at all. It'd be very easy for some cow to walk up and start nibbling on him (oh sweet irony). Adrienne Barbeau would have to dump his ass for something higher on the food chain like an amoeba.

Adrienne Barbeau was hot in Swamp Thing. You really want to give that up just so you can have quantum-enhanced solar power? Wait, that does sound pretty cool.

when I was growing up I watched a whole bunch of violet movies and it didn't "corrupt my moral fiber"

Like this? Or like this?

when I was growing up I watched a whole bunch of violet movies and it didn't "corrupt my moral fiber"

Like this? Or like this?

It's a lot easier for our New Martian Overlords to intercept and disrupt our space-based routers than those on the ground.

Anyone wanna help me rip my record collection?

Incidentally, it's Rodney's son who opens the door in that scene. He is played in the movie by Keith Gordon, who would later go on to direct the film adaptation of Vonnegut's "Mother Night."

Incidentally, it's Rodney's son who opens the door in that scene. He is played in the movie by Keith Gordon, who would later go on to direct the film adaptation of Vonnegut's "Mother Night."

whoosh!

She also showed her boobies during prime-time network television, at least in some markets, in 1973. See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0167415/ I never imagined that would be the first, and last time, it was done on broadcast TV.

Already been done.

I agree with your parent post, Blizzard is in a bind in their effort to protect their IP.

Nobody with money-paying data on a computer would install such intrusive software--why risk it.

If you gotta have your World Of Warcraft fix, do it from a 'throwaway' PC with no valuable data on it. PC's are cheap enought to do something like that. However be prepared to pay BIG BUCKS for system performance if you want the 'throwaway' PC to be an ACTUAL online gamer PC 'rig'....

P.S. OT reply from iamcf13 to torvaun - please reply

Re:Remove all financial incentives for malware...

Sorry, I didn't reply before the topic was locked...

Sadly, money is required to get ANYTHING 'worthwhile' done in a capitalistic society like the USA.

Look at how the media showers the financially successful and lucky money winners with LOTS of attention and accolades.

Open source has it's place in the world but all it does is 'open doors' for those who contribute to it (if it does at all)--not pay the bills they have to pay RIGHT NOW.... :(

The 'black hatters' that spread malware for free are either outright antisocial and/or psychopathic or are otherwise on somebody else's payroll getting paid IN CASH for their 'skills'. If you get a chance, watch the NUMB3RS TV episode 'Backscatter' for a GREAT example of the dangers of for-profit black hat 'hacking' (really cracking).

I agree with your parent post, Blizzard is in a bind in their effort to protect their IP.

Nobody with money-paying data on a computer would install such intrusive software--why risk it.

If you gotta have your World Of Warcraft fix, do it from a 'throwaway' PC with no valuable data on it. PC's are cheap enought to do something like that. However be prepared to pay BIG BUCKS for system performance if you want the 'throwaway' PC to be an ACTUAL online gamer PC 'rig'....

P.S. OT reply from iamcf13 to torvaun - please reply

Re:Remove all financial incentives for malware...

Sorry, I didn't reply before the topic was locked...

Sadly, money is required to get ANYTHING 'worthwhile' done in a capitalistic society like the USA.

Look at how the media showers the financially successful and lucky money winners with LOTS of attention and accolades.

Open source has it's place in the world but all it does is 'open doors' for those who contribute to it (if it does at all)--not pay the bills they have to pay RIGHT NOW.... :(

The 'black hatters' that spread malware for free are either outright antisocial and/or psychopathic or are otherwise on somebody else's payroll getting paid IN CASH for their 'skills'. If you get a chance, watch the NUMB3RS TV episode 'Backscatter' for a GREAT example of the dangers of for-profit black hat 'hacking' (really cracking).

Come on, everyone knows the last "superhacker" died off when Zero Cool married Acid Burn.

Nah, it wasn't Acid Burn what killed him. It was a vampire.

- G

You this "the Principal" ... James Belushi and Louis Gossett Jr. striking another bad-ass pose

Does anyone speak jive?

Barbara Billingsley does.

Interesting perspective. I think there's just a difference in opinion between my generation (I'm 23) and yours (your website says 47). I've never thought it to be a violent word but perhaps I have been overexposed to it growing up and just don't think about it.

I'm 49 now (and have updated that page, thx for the heads up). It may very well be age-related. It is also related to how much we try to improve ourselves. If we don't, we have a lot of default behaviors that are unhealthy -- bgates' cheeseburger habit comes to mind.

With Sin City, my wife and I never even finished it. We watched about 20 to 30 minutes, got increasingly grossed out and disgusted by it, and stopped. It is _not_ visually attractive (but it is visually different), it has extremely vial and disgusting scenes and attitude, but at least it has helped me to eliminate a whole new category of movies -- "graphic novels by Rodriguez", like his latest humdinger.

Perhaps that's just the problem these days - my generation has been so overexposed to profanity that we don't really register the connotations associated with using them. I don't really think they hold much meaning to any of us; so when we swear, it's meaningless and has become equivalent, in our eyes, to saying "Shitty day." instead of "My day isn't going well." in response to "How's it going?"

I think that is an extremely good point, and here is a related true story. I lived in residence for a year (Totem Park, at the U of B.C.) and remember seeing a guy with the "have a [crappy] day" shirt. So one day I went up to him and enthusiastically wished him what it said on his shirt. He took it very very poorly.

Maybe receiving a swear word is totally different in feel to saying one. Kind of gets back to that guy thing -- wanting to impose ourselves on the world, oblivious to what others think until we have been dumped by enough girls to want to change.

The f word is one of the ugliest words in the English language. Using it is violent -- it says "I have no ability to express myself in a refined, intelligent way. When I drop the F bomb I feel all powerful. Besides, I am a Mark Wahlberg wannabe." Using it announces your complete lack of concern for other people. Real men don't use the f word.

The preceding was my opinion. Good luck with your's.

If Apple actually has the slightest interest in increasing market share beyond the current they have to offer what mainstream buyers want and are used to. A decent mid size tower at an affordable price.

I know the iMac was an instant success (and it was a nice all-in-one), but it never had to compete with a decent non-pro Mac mini tower. We can't know for sure, but I'd bet those floppy disks. Floppy disks are pretty expensive, you know.

A great summary (with screenshots) here. This movie also had another good example of HOS (Hollywood OS) featuring really big fonts.

The Soviet system wasn't really centrally-administered either. The economy was controlled by the haggling and political struggles of the party bosses.
Soviet propaganda: to each according to their needs.
Capitalist propaganda: to each according to their ability.
Reality: it's who you know.
See: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/23/ 224254 and http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=1B5 9C157-136A-4C1F-8F96-67847B42932E

As we move away from an economy based on commodities towards one dominated by the service industries, market forces will mean less and less. Where's Patrick Swayze when you need him? http://imdb.com/title/tt0087985/
What's this have to do with using two monitors?

They forgot Earth: Final Conflict. The 3d movement interface in flying the shuttles were interesting. Of course if it was not a woman pilot, would the movements be the same?

I think the reference was actually from the movie starring Kirk Douglas and directed by Stanley Kubrick, which predates stuff like IRC by more than twenty years. The bash.org quote is a reference to the movie, too. Good movie.

It's an interesting way of looking at things. Out of curiosity,... do you have any children? (I realize both of our parents had them.)

Christ no! I don't think that with my current lifestyle I am capable of providing a healthy upbringing for a child.

Maybe that's just an excuse, but the point is that people who are not convinced that they are ready to be parents probably shouldn't be them.

On the other hand, I did just watch Idiocracy...

...Laputa? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092067

Why does this remind me of the avatar librarian from Time Machine?

Robert Rodriguez made El Mariachi, later quasi-remade into Desperado, with a budget of only $6,000. He did everything from selling his own blood for fundraising to casting his own family members in the movie.

On the El Mariachi DVD, there was a special feature called something like "The 10-minute film school of Robert Rodriguez". It probably talks about some of the stuff in his book, like how not to waste film. For example, if somebody throws a gun up to a balcony, but misses the balcony - don't throw the film away. Just cut the part after the gun misses the balcony and paste other footage which shows the gun landing on the balcony. Hollywood would have just scrapped the whole day's take and reshot the whole scene and what a waste that is. This is why old-school Hong Kong films like Hard Boiled can have more explosions and action than Die Hard, but only costing $4 million US to make.

Robert Rodriguez made El Mariachi, later quasi-remade into Desperado, with a budget of only $6,000. He did everything from selling his own blood for fundraising to casting his own family members in the movie.

On the El Mariachi DVD, there was a special feature called something like "The 10-minute film school of Robert Rodriguez". It probably talks about some of the stuff in his book, like how not to waste film. For example, if somebody throws a gun up to a balcony, but misses the balcony - don't throw the film away. Just cut the part after the gun misses the balcony and paste other footage which shows the gun landing on the balcony. Hollywood would have just scrapped the whole day's take and reshot the whole scene and what a waste that is. This is why old-school Hong Kong films like Hard Boiled can have more explosions and action than Die Hard, but only costing $4 million US to make.

And so, apart from the amazing advances in medical treatment, jet engines, the internet and the first electronic computers, WHAT has military-requested government funding ever done for us! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079470/quotes

That's the black and white and anyone who is intelligent and rational, will not be touching this issue. The fact that this question is even raised says to me that without a doubt, any useful scientists are soon going to be extinct; due to nothing more than politics! The movie Idiocracy comes to mind.

And could you imagine a Chimp on re-entry? A space monkey coming BACK to Earth, wtf! Absurd!

I don't know if it's the film you're thinking of, but Strange Days used the concept of experience playback quite a bit IIRC. It's IMDB page can be found here: http://imdb.com/title/tt0114558/

Odd, I was thinking of this :
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067992/

Batman was his copilot.

Yes you are. I think most were probably thinking of this: http://imdb.com/title/tt0116996/.

Don't run, we are your friends.

But Oracle is bad and wrong and supporting Oracle is therefore bad and wrong.

Red Hat fanatics are bar none the worst fanboys in my ever-so-humble opinion.

But Red Hat users, which I stopped being around 6.1, are clinging desperately to a distribution that doesn't care about them unless they have shitpiles of money. That goes for Fedora, too.

Am I the only one who thought about this? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078748/

http://imdb.com/chart/scifi

Here are some of the highlights:

1. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
2. Star Wars (1977)
3. The Matrix (1999)
4. Metropolis (1927)
5. Alien (1979)
6. Aliens (1986)
7. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
8. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
9. Blade Runner (1982)
10. Donnie Darko (2001)
11. The Incredibles (2004)
12. Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
  (... skip some ...)
30. The Invisible Man (1933)
31. Planet of the Apes (1968)
32. Brazil (1985)
33. Kaze no tani no Naushika (1984) / Warriors of the Wind
34. Delicatessen (1991)
35. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
36. Tenkû no shiro Rapyuta (1986) / Castle in the Sky
37. Night of the Living Dead (1968)
38. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
39. X2 (2003)
40. Serenity (2005)
41. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
42. The Truman Show (1998)
43. Spider-Man 2 (2004)

You act as if Star Wars was. You had some flashy visuals and some great characters, but if you really get into the story, it was pure cheese. Princess captured, guy teams up with pirate hero type, the daring rescue of the princess, final battle, evil beaten. Seriously, you pretty have the same formula of every other movie out there, and this was with campy acting ("But I was going into Tashi station to get some power converters" or Fisher's in and out "Euro" accent).

I really can't say I liked the SW Trilogy, at this point, I am simply a fan of Empire, that happened to have 5 other movies around it. I think that after Empire you seriously drop off in quality (maybe because of the 6 films it is the only one to have a real director). Star Wars, IMHO is highly overrated, mostly for the above reasons.

Now, I will grant you that Star Wars (Ep 4) I think is a HUGELY revolutionary film, reshaping the landscape of sci-fi (for good or ill). I think we were lucky to have Lucas make it, because it has given us tons of other movies we never would have gotten had it not come out. I think it deserves it's credit because of that. But I just don't think it should be slobbered as a good movie.

I will grant you, Serenity as a stand alone - only so good. But I think there are a ton of other good sci fi that surpasses SW in quality. Alien(s) (1 or 2) and The Matrix come to mind. And within it's established TV realm, Serenity is a great movie.

RonB

This sums it up...

http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross

By the numbers

I don't know. Watching "Seven Years in Tibet" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120102/) felt like I was watching it in real time and my ex-wife made me sit through that *grin*

Many consider Star Wars to be fantasy instead of science fiction because while Star Wars has space ships and technology that perhaps might exist, very little of the story cared about how humans interact with this new technology. Contrast this with something like the Matrix, Blade Runner, or 2001 where the authors are obviously preoccupied with fleshing out the problems of some new technology (even if it wasn't made by humans). Star Wars was more about the battles of wizards in space.

Good argument. The only thing that doesn't settle well with me is your argument based on the groundbreaking technology that ILM developed. That argument doesn't exactly sound objective, it sounds like Star Wars would always be at the top and any other movie would at best get #2 just because they didn't develop the technology first.

But keeping with your arguments I think the film Things to Come deserves a spot on the list. I wasn't around in 1936 to see this one in the theaters but I have to believe this movie was not only groundbreaking but also showed a huge amount of foresight. It was just three years off on its prediction of a second world war and seems to have predicted the concept of the flying wing. Of course it's H.G. Wells I should really thank for that foresight.

Where is "Brazil"? Where is "12 Monkeys"?

Great movies (Brazil is actually one of my favorite movies of all time), but hardly Science Fiction in the movie sense. In the movies, science fiction equals space opera, or at least big special futuristic effects. In literature, it encompasses a wild variety of genres of which space opera is only a very small part.

Would Brazil and 12 Monkeys be included, I guess we would also see The Truman Show, Stalker, A Clockwork Orange, Dr. Strangelove, and Jakob's Ladder on the list. All SF and great movies, but hardly recognised as such by the average movie goer.

Then again - maybe it is the voting process itself. Ask the average movie goer to name his favorites and you may end up with a list of reasonably good movies, but certainly not with the best (or most contraversial) movies. Still, that does not explain 2001 on the list.

Where is "Brazil"? Where is "12 Monkeys"?

Great movies (Brazil is actually one of my favorite movies of all time), but hardly Science Fiction in the movie sense. In the movies, science fiction equals space opera, or at least big special futuristic effects. In literature, it encompasses a wild variety of genres of which space opera is only a very small part.

Would Brazil and 12 Monkeys be included, I guess we would also see The Truman Show, Stalker, A Clockwork Orange, Dr. Strangelove, and Jakob's Ladder on the list. All SF and great movies, but hardly recognised as such by the average movie goer.

Then again - maybe it is the voting process itself. Ask the average movie goer to name his favorites and you may end up with a list of reasonably good movies, but certainly not with the best (or most contraversial) movies. Still, that does not explain 2001 on the list.

Where is "Brazil"? Where is "12 Monkeys"?

Great movies (Brazil is actually one of my favorite movies of all time), but hardly Science Fiction in the movie sense. In the movies, science fiction equals space opera, or at least big special futuristic effects. In literature, it encompasses a wild variety of genres of which space opera is only a very small part.

Would Brazil and 12 Monkeys be included, I guess we would also see The Truman Show, Stalker, A Clockwork Orange, Dr. Strangelove, and Jakob's Ladder on the list. All SF and great movies, but hardly recognised as such by the average movie goer.

Then again - maybe it is the voting process itself. Ask the average movie goer to name his favorites and you may end up with a list of reasonably good movies, but certainly not with the best (or most contraversial) movies. Still, that does not explain 2001 on the list.